Blew v. Ryan Township
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 53, Oct. T., 1909, by de fendant, from judgment of C. P. Schuylkill Co., July T., 1908, No. 116, on verdict for plaintiff in case of William Blew v. Ryan Township. Assumpsit for removing a tree and shoveling snow from a highway. Before Bechtel, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 53, Oct. T., 1909, by de fendant, from judgment of C. P. Schuylkill Co., July T., 1908, No. 116, on verdict for plaintiff in case of William Blew v. Ryan Township. Assumpsit for removing a tree and shoveling snow from a highway. Before Bechtel, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Carl Winkle, a witness for defendant, was asked this question: “Q. How long, in your judgment, would it take to make two cuts in that tree, one at the stump as it now appears, and another eight or ten feet away, the tree being a chestnut tree and having a hollow of ten or twelve…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Morrison, J.,
This case was commenced before a justice of the peace and *512it came into the common pleas by appeal of defendant and was tried on the transcript standing as a declaration. The plaintiff claimed $18.20 for labor performed for defendant, with interest thereon for five years and nine months, and obtained judgment before the justice for $24.50. Such a stale claim as this one, with the very loose and unsatisfactory evidence offered in its support, makes it look suspicious.
In the common pleas the plaintiff’s testimony was offered to support the claim of $10.00 for the wages of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Anderson v. Hamilton TownshipSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1855
- Salsbury v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1863
3Cited by1 opinion
- McCullough v. Holland Furnace Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928